From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adolf Belka To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rename misleading "check filesystem" reboot option NL translation Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 17:59:17 +0100 Message-ID: <8e0a77f6-718b-5569-502c-37a45d055c2d@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2603373058955609304==" List-Id: --===============2603373058955609304== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19/11/2022 16:20, Tom Rymes wrote: > This does raise the question of how a user would repair filesystem errors i= f this option only checks for errors and does not present the option to repai= r any issues found. > > Should the be an option to do that? My view on that is that there should not be the option to repair. Repair of a filesystem in some automated fashion without looking at the=20 specific errors involved and deciding the best way to fix them is more=20 likely to result in worse damage than to make things better. If the filesystem involved is a journaling one and that doesn't fix=20 things on a reboot then I believe some pretty severe corruption is=20 likely to have occurred and the best thing is to re-install IPFire and=20 do a restore and/or look at the smart data to see if the hard disk is on=20 the way out rather than trying to fix the corrupted parts of the filesystem. It might be a good idea to put the above info into the wiki page so that=20 people have some guidance on the recommended approach if they end up=20 with errors from the fsck. Regards, Adolf. > Tom > >> On Nov 19, 2022, at 7:47 AM, Leo-Andres Hofmann = wrote: >> >> =EF=BB=BFOk, this was probably a bad idea. So please ignore/remove this pa= tch. Sorry for the noise. >> >>> Am 19.11.2022 um 12:53 schrieb Michael Tremer: >>> I can second this. >>> >>> Why is fsck more obvious then =E2=80=9Cfile system check=E2=80=9D? >>> >>> It is a more technical term which does not provide any more detail in my = opinion. >>> >>> -Michael >>> >>>>> On 18 Nov 2022, at 18:02, Tom Rymes wrote: >>>> I'm still confused by what a user might expect, OTHER than a fsck check? >>>> >>>> On 11/18/2022 10:42 AM, Robin Roevens wrote: >>>>> Some users assume that "check filesystem" does more than just >>>>> trigger a simple "fsck" run. This patch changes the button label to avo= id >>>>> confusion. - NL translation >>>>> Signed-off-by: Robin Roevens >>>>> --- >>>>> langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl | 1 + >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>>>> diff --git a/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl b/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl >>>>> index 4fd6955cc..ebac2754a 100644 >>>>> --- a/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl >>>>> +++ b/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl >>>>> @@ -1804,6 +1804,7 @@ >>>>> 'read list' =3D> 'lijst met readonly hosts', >>>>> 'real address' =3D> 'Echte adressen', >>>>> 'reboot' =3D> 'Herstarten', >>>>> +'reboot fsck' =3D> 'Herstart & start ‘fsck’', >>>>> 'reboot ask' =3D> 'Herstarten?', >>>>> 'reboot question' =3D> 'Extra vraag voor herstart en afsluiten', >>>>> 'reboot schedule' =3D> 'Inplannen IPFire herstarts', --=20 Sent from my laptop --===============2603373058955609304==--